Attacking Darius:

penny wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:A missile has the inclined planes of a wedge above and below it, and extending some km ahead and to the sides of it.

Like with a ship's wedge the throat of the wedge (the forward opening) is going to be taller than than the skirt of the wedge (the aft opening). However IIRC we're told that the wedge planes become slightly closer to parallel under hard acceleration - and with missiles having 75+ times the acceleration of a ship that info should make angle of their wedges less pronounced than a warship (or even an RD) wedge.

This is a copy of the infodump page that includes a diagram of a ship, inside its wedge with sidewalls up. https://web.archive.org/web/20220704001 ... ton/100/0/

Thanks for the infodump.

I understand that it is difficult to obtain a firing angle on an object configured with a wedge. That is why point defense has to wait until the point a missile prepares to fire. (I think it drops its wedge?)

In Layman's terms, an anology if you will ...

If a missile is a human body that has a head and a tail (feet). Fore and aft. And if that human missile is wearing a helmet on its head (wedge) and steel-toed boots on its tail (wedge) and it is boring right in on you, then it is difficult to get a shot at its vulnerable regions. The sides of the human body; the ribs. The ribs are sensitive and vulnerable. That is why sidewalls are necessary. To protect the ribcage.

But if an enemy penetrates an attacker's launch with his own missiles -- storyline has dramatized the idea that launches interpenetrated each other, passed each other like strangers in the night -- then those interpenetrated missiles should have a clearer shot (perfect angle actually) at the opposing missiles' ribcages. No?

Well, the CM based point defense doesn't care about wedge alignment because when the CM's wedge touches the missile's wedge both missiles disappear in a puff of boom.

But even the PDLC doesn't have to wait for the missile wedge to drop before engaging. In a broadside on engagement the attacking missile needs to point its noise roughly towards the ship, and at that point the PDLC on the target can fire down the open throat of the missile's wedge.

Also, because ships would form walls of battle some of the surrounding ships will have firing angles through the throat or sides of the missile's wedge (while others will be too far above or below the missile and have their line of sight blocked by the missile's wedge)

However the missile might be coming in on an angle where its wedge, or even the wedge of the targeted ship, blocks line of sight and then it can become a race between the PDLC and the laserhead for which can hit first once the line of sight clears.



As to your analogy - more or less; though humans walking are a bad analogy to a missile flying because the humans walk upright while the missile flies pointed horizontally. And helmets are a poor analogy to the upper wedge because, oddly, they both provide slightly too much, and also vastly too little, coverage compared to a wedge.

1) helmets don't extend anywhere near far enough laterally from the head -- think more an metal plate larger than a city block somehow floating above you.

Depending on helmet design, even someone directly above you can probably see your shoulders and arms peeking out beyond its protection; and they don't need to be very far off from directly above before your legs and torso appear past the helmet. The same isn't true for a wedge because it extends so far to all sides -- they need to move well over 45 degrees off the vertical before there's any line of sight to the missile.

2) But a helmet also curves down to provide some head protection from shots coming in horizontally -- while the wedge doesn't do that at all. No part of the missile is shielded by its wedge from a shot coming in horizontally.

penny wrote:How are wedges aligned? Do wedges encompass a missile? A missile does not have sidewalls.

The missile spins to allow the impeller drive to provide directional control.

kzt wrote:.

I left a question in "Forum Rules and Information" wondering why strike though does not work. I thought I had seen it done before. I did not understand what you were trying to do at first. I had to read up on BBCode.

penny wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:A missile has the inclined planes of a wedge above and below it, and extending some km ahead and to the sides of it.

Like with a ship's wedge the throat of the wedge (the forward opening) is going to be taller than than the skirt of the wedge (the aft opening). However IIRC we're told that the wedge planes become slightly closer to parallel under hard acceleration - and with missiles having 75+ times the acceleration of a ship that info should make angle of their wedges less pronounced than a warship (or even an RD) wedge.

This is a copy of the infodump page that includes a diagram of a ship, inside its wedge with sidewalls up. https://web.archive.org/web/20220704001 ... ton/100/0/

Thanks for the infodump.

I understand that it is difficult to obtain a firing angle on an object configured with a wedge. That is why point defense has to wait until the point a missile prepares to fire. (I think it drops its wedge?)

In Layman's terms, an anology if you will ...

If a missile is a human body that has a head and a tail (feet). Fore and aft. And if that human missile is wearing a helmet on its head (wedge) and steel-toed boots on its tail (wedge) and it is boring right in on you, then it is difficult to get a shot at its vulnerable regions. The sides of the human body; the ribs. The ribs are sensitive and vulnerable. That is why sidewalls are necessary. To protect the ribcage.

But if an enemy penetrates an attacker's launch with his own missiles -- storyline has dramatized the idea that launches interpenetrated each other, passed each other like strangers in the night -- then those interpenetrated missiles should have a clearer shot (perfect angle actually) at the opposing missiles' ribcages. No?

Jonathan_S wrote:Well, the CM based point defense doesn't care about wedge alignment because when the CM's wedge touches the missile's wedge both missiles disappear in a puff of boom.

But even the PDLC doesn't have to wait for the missile wedge to drop before engaging. In a broadside on engagement the attacking missile needs to point its noise roughly towards the ship, and at that point the PDLC on the target can fire down the open throat of the missile's wedge.

Also, because ships would form walls of battle some of the surrounding ships will have firing angles through the throat or sides of the missile's wedge (while others will be too far above or below the missile and have their line of sight blocked by the missile's wedge)

However the missile might be coming in on an angle where its wedge, or even the wedge of the targeted ship, blocks line of sight and then it can become a race between the PDLC and the laserhead for which can hit first once the line of sight clears.



As to your analogy - more or less; though humans walking are a bad analogy to a missile flying because the humans walk upright while the missile flies pointed horizontally. And helmets are a poor analogy to the upper wedge because, oddly, they both provide slightly too much, and also vastly too little, coverage compared to a wedge.

Except when humans are illegally spearing a runner on the gridiron or when a wrestler spears another they are attacking while in a horizontal position. Anyway I assumed it was obvious I was saying the orientation is the same for sake of discussion. Superman is a flying missile. Some wrestlers and defensive backs are also super men.

Jonathan_S wrote:1) helmets don't extend anywhere near far enough laterally from the head -- think more an metal plate larger than a city block somehow floating above you.

Depending on helmet design, even someone directly above you can probably see your shoulders and arms peeking out beyond its protection; and they don't need to be very far off from directly above before your legs and torso appear past the helmet. The same isn't true for a wedge because it extends so far to all sides -- they need to move well over 45 degrees off the vertical before there's any line of sight to the missile.

2) But a helmet also curves down to provide some head protection from shots coming in horizontally -- while the wedge doesn't do that at all. No part of the missile is shielded by its wedge from a shot coming in horizontally.

That is the fact that I am trying to -- first establish, then -- zero in on. The missile is not shielded from a horizontal attack. Which could easily come from an opposing missile passing right beside it.

penny wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:1) helmets don't extend anywhere near far enough laterally from the head -- think more an metal plate larger than a city block somehow floating above you.

Depending on helmet design, even someone directly above you can probably see your shoulders and arms peeking out beyond its protection; and they don't need to be very far off from directly above before your legs and torso appear past the helmet. The same isn't true for a wedge because it extends so far to all sides -- they need to move well over 45 degrees off the vertical before there's any line of sight to the missile.

2) But a helmet also curves down to provide some head protection from shots coming in horizontally -- while the wedge doesn't do that at all. No part of the missile is shielded by its wedge from a shot coming in horizontally.

That is the fact that I am trying to -- first establish, then -- zero in on. The missile is not shielded from a horizontal attack. Which could easily come from an opposing missile passing right beside it.

Ah - if you have the human in spear mode then your analogy was way off. the protection wouldn't be on their heads and feet, but on their belly and back.

If a human is sliding towards you on their stomach (say across a frozen pond) then the wedge analog would be protecting their back from fire coming from above (and there should also be one protecting their belly from fire from below; but I'm going to ignore fire from below ground level - just for ease of description). Their head, sides, and feet, would be complete unprotected by the wedge against relatively horizontal fire.

Extending the analogy a bit, that would make a helmet more like a buckler bow wall -- providing protection from a very limited angles of dead-ahead fire, while still leaving their back or sides vulnerable to ahead fire that is offset enough up or to the sides to angle past the helmet. (Assume that, like most helmets, a high power round hitting it dead one would penetrate -- since, unlike the wedge, the bow walls aren't impervious to penetration)

A full bow wall, or sidewalls, would be much larger vertical protection, though not fully bulletproof, giving some protection from fire against the head or sides.

penny wrote:That is the fact that I am trying to -- first establish, then -- zero in on. The missile is not shielded from a horizontal attack. Which could easily come from an opposing missile passing right beside it.

Yes, in theory. At least assuming that both missiles had their wedges oriented parallel to each other. Because, this is space, so when we say "horizontal" we mean with respect to the missile's dorsal and ventral surfaces -- and may have zero relevance to the ecliptic plane, or orientation of the target, or of other nearby missiles.


A missile could roll along its long axis to change the orientation of the side openings of its wedge. There's no inherent reason why missiles passing each other would be oriented so the open sides of their wedges pointed at each other.

Also, nobody has demonstrated a missile able to fire a standoff weapon and hit another missile. Missile to missile kills have been limited to wedge collisions -- obliterating both missiles. (And anti-ship missiles are almost never used against incoming anti-ship missiles -- so even if their laserheads could pick off an incoming missile it's unlikely to become a common defensive tactic)

penny wrote:That is the fact that I am trying to -- first establish, then -- zero in on. The missile is not shielded from a horizontal attack. Which could easily come from an opposing missile passing right beside it.

Jonathan_S wrote:Yes, in theory. At least assuming that both missiles had their wedges oriented parallel to each other. Because, this is space, so when we say "horizontal" we mean with respect to the missile's dorsal and ventral surfaces -- and may have zero relevance to the ecliptic plane, or orientation of the target, or of other nearby missiles.

A missile could roll along its long axis to change the orientation of the side openings of its wedge. There's no inherent reason why missiles passing each other would be oriented so the open sides of their wedges pointed at each other.

Also, nobody has demonstrated a missile able to fire a standoff weapon and hit another missile. Missile to missile kills have been limited to wedge collisions -- obliterating both missiles. (And anti-ship missiles are almost never used against incoming anti-ship missiles -- so even if their laserheads could pick off an incoming missile it's unlikely to become a common defensive tactic)

Given the width of the wedge as 5 km and the separation being .5 km (both numbers given earlier). That gives a circumference of about 15.7 km with two gaps that add to 1 km, resulting in about a 6.4 % chance of the angle being correct to see the missile between the wedges.

penny wrote:

Jonathan_S wrote:1) helmets don't extend anywhere near far enough laterally from the head -- think more an metal plate larger than a city block somehow floating above you.

Depending on helmet design, even someone directly above you can probably see your shoulders and arms peeking out beyond its protection; and they don't need to be very far off from directly above before your legs and torso appear past the helmet. The same isn't true for a wedge because it extends so far to all sides -- they need to move well over 45 degrees off the vertical before there's any line of sight to the missile.

2) But a helmet also curves down to provide some head protection from shots coming in horizontally -- while the wedge doesn't do that at all. No part of the missile is shielded by its wedge from a shot coming in horizontally.

That is the fact that I am trying to -- first establish, then -- zero in on. The missile is not shielded from a horizontal attack. Which could easily come from an opposing missile passing right beside it.

Jonathan_S wrote:Ah - if you have the human in spear mode then your analogy was way off. the protection wouldn't be on their heads and feet, but on their belly and back.

If a human is sliding towards you on their stomach (say across a frozen pond) then the wedge analog would be protecting their back from fire coming from above (and there should also be one protecting their belly from fire from below; but I'm going to ignore fire from below ground level - just for ease of description). Their head, sides, and feet, would be complete unprotected by the wedge against relatively horizontal fire.

Extending the analogy a bit, that would make a helmet more like a buckler bow wall -- providing protection from a very limited angles of dead-ahead fire, while still leaving their back or sides vulnerable to ahead fire that is offset enough up or to the sides to angle past the helmet. (Assume that, like most helmets, a high power round hitting it dead one would penetrate -- since, unlike the wedge, the bow walls aren't impervious to penetration)

A full bow wall, or sidewalls, would be much larger vertical protection, though not fully bulletproof, giving some protection from fire against the head or sides.

Thank you! For the very first time I can see the geometries like the author intended. That is why I decided to use the analogy of the human body, because we are all familiar with the human anatomy and can talk in terms like ... head, feet, belly, back, rib cage, etc.

Finally, understanding! Thanks!!! And thanks to the human body. I always thought the wedge was akin to a rocket's engine and it is the propulsive force protruding from the bottom of the rocket. Because I thought the wedge was responsible for propulsion. But it is the impeller. Ok. Cool. I hope the analogy has helped someone else as well.

But that still leaves the rib cages exposed to direct fire. But I understand much better about the angle, and needing to be on or very near the same plane.

I still think the tactic might be worth testing. Which would enable one CM to destroy more than just one other missile. If I am correct, it would require less CMs launched and stocked in cargo holds.

Or, size differential notwithstanding, it might enable missiles to also be used as CMs. What is the size of a CM to an MK-23? A CM must be significantly smaller. As I think I remember it in one of MaxxQ's drawings.

penny wrote:Thank you! For the very first time I can see the geometries like the author intended. That is why I decided to use the analogy of the human body, because we are all familiar with the human anatomy and can talk in terms like ... head, feet, belly, back, rib cage, etc.

Finally, understanding! Thanks!!! And thanks to the human body. I always thought the wedge was akin to a rocket's engine and it is the propulsive force protruding from the bottom of the rocket. Because I thought the wedge was responsible for propulsion. But it is the impeller. Ok. Cool. I hope the analogy has helped someone else as well.

But that still leaves the rib cages exposed to direct fire. But I understand much better about the angle, and needing to be on or very near the same plane.

I still think the tactic might be worth testing. Which would enable one CM to destroy more than just one other missile. If I am correct, it would require less CMs launched and stocked in cargo holds.

Or, size differential notwithstanding, it might enable missiles to also be used as CMs. What is the size of a CM to an MK-23? A CM must be significantly smaller. As I think I remember it in one of MaxxQ's drawings.

Yeah, the wedges are inclined planes above and below the long axis of the ship or missile. They move forward and apparently by pushing forward on the impeller rings that create them that pushes the ship or missile forward. (Vaguely like squeezing a ball between your fingers until it pops out away from them)

And yes, the sides of the rib cage, in this example, are unprotected by wedge (but, for a ship, would be protected by sidewalls which run the length of the wedge -- and parallel to long axis of the ship)


The issue with a missing using an energy weapon to shoot down a passing missile is that laserheads going off destroy the missile, just like a wedge-to-wedge contact would. So blow up a Viper and it still kills, at most, one incoming missile. Okay it can hit one that's further away, maybe up to 50,000 km -- on the other hand to do that it needs to be accurate to within a couple of meters -- against a target that's kind of hard to see. Remember than ship based PDLC which can fire many, many shots per second and are backed by far more capable sensors than any missile can carry, usually need dozens of shots to hit an incoming missile.
OTOH in the Viper goes for the CM style wedge-to-wedge kill it only needs to be accurate to within 5 - 10 km, a thousand times less accurate for the same number of kills.

Even a Mk23 can only fire its laserhead once. Now if it had perfect accuracy against missiles (which is absolutely does NOT) it might be able to kill multiple as it does have several independently aimed lasing rods and could try to aim one each at multiple missiles. Though it'd likely just miss with all of them -- heck it'd probably miss with all of them if it aimed them all at a single missile.


Now in TIEF we are told that Foraker and Hemhill, the 'Demonic Duo', are working on unmanned FTL controlled LACs -- and likely looking to use them to push the missile defense zone even further out. Those would put PDLCs further downrange, and they can take many shots at passing missile - in a way that your outgoing missiles cannot.

Jonathan_S wrote:Also, nobody has demonstrated a missile able to fire a standoff weapon and hit another missile. Missile to missile kills have been limited to wedge collisions -- obliterating both missiles. (And anti-ship missiles are almost never used against incoming anti-ship missiles -- so even if their laserheads could pick off an incoming missile it's unlikely to become a common defensive tactic)

The time it would have to do so is also rather minimal.

Let's take an example of two MDMs fired at each other and meeting in the middle after 5 minutes of acceleration. Each missile has accelerated to 0.45c, so the relative velocity between the two is 0.9c (correct calculation under Relativity would be 0.75c). At these speeds, 3 seconds means the weapon has moved 810,000 km (675,000 km). So if it started firing when the other missiles were 405,000 km away and rotated along, it could continue firing until they were 405,000 km away again (assuming negligible separation).

But it isn't that easy. First, in this scenario, the targeted missile is still under wedge power, so it can use its acceleration of thousands of gravities to jink, so the effective range is going to be much, much less. It's never going to be flying on a straight line. Second, the rotation required for this is probably going to tear the graser apart: still assuming negligible separation, the other missile is within 10,000 km for 74 ms (88 ms), so its rotation is going to be higher than 2000 degrees per second. Unlike the targeted missile, the graser one has shed its wedge in order to fire, so it can't use the wedge for rotation and is subject to the full inertia (ditto for a torpedo using spider drive).

Instead of mounting standoff anti-missile weapons on the missile, it's easier to just use the missiles as missiles. Have a few of the Dragon's Teeth or MAN equivalents fire, blinding and frying the oncoming missiles. Or just use Boom-mode nukes to fry them. Heck, explode as millions of tiny shrapnel particles like autoguns.

Or, do what Harkness did and turn the missiles wedge-first to the other ones, so they sweep the range with their 10x10 km wedges.